Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31277511›Full record

ArticleAnimals : an open access journal from MDPI2019

Determination of Prolactin in Canine Saliva: Is it Possible to Use a Commercial ELISA kit?

Jara Gutiérrez, Angelo Gazzano, Beatrice Torracca, Valentina Meucci, Chiara Mariti

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Animals : an open access journal from MDPI, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jara GutiérrezDipartimento di ScienzeVeterinarie, Università di Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy. jara.gutierrez@vet.unipi.it.
Angelo GazzanoDipartimento di ScienzeVeterinarie, Università di Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy.
Beatrice TorraccaDipartimento di ScienzeVeterinarie, Università di Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy.
Valentina MeucciDipartimento di ScienzeVeterinarie, Università di Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy.
Chiara MaritiDipartimento di ScienzeVeterinarie, Università di Pisa, 56124 Pisa, Italy.
University of Pisa · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prolactin has been reported to be a remarkable index of stress response, both acute and chronic, in several species. The use of biological matrixes other than blood is receiving increasing interest in the study of hormones, due to the lower invasiveness in collection. This research aimed to investigate the possibility of using a commercial ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) kit for measuring canine prolactin in blood for the quantification of canine prolactin in saliva. Study 1 consisted of a validation protocol, using saliva samples collected from lactating and non-lactating dogs. Study 2 was conducted to investigate a possible correlation between prolactin concentration in saliva and plasma in sheltered dogs by using the same kit. Prolactin values were reliably read only when they came from blood samples, not from saliva, but tended to be low in most of the cases. Study 1 showed that saliva had a matrix effect. In study 2, saliva prolactin levels were low and in 42.9% of cases, not readable. No correlation between prolactin values in plasma and saliva was found (ρ=0.482; p=0.274). These findings suggested that the determination of prolactin in dog saliva through an ELISA kit created for measuring prolactin in dog blood was unreliable.

Indexed as

blooddogsprolactinsalivastress

Identifiers

PMID31277511
PMCPMC6680982
OpenAlexW2955256202

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.